切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"
高级检索
中华胃食管反流病电子杂志

中华胃食管反流病电子杂志 ›› 2021, Vol. 08 ›› Issue (03) : 129 -135. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-8765.2021.03.004

论著

平均夜间基线阻抗在胃食管反流病中的应用
马志凤1, 刘太阳2, 杨杰3,†()   
  1. 1. 550002　贵阳，贵州省人民医院消化科
    2. 550002　贵阳，贵州医科大学
    3. 550004　贵阳，贵州医科大学附属医院消化科
  • 收稿日期:2021-03-12 出版日期:2021-08-15
  • 通信作者: 杨杰

Application of mean nocturnal baseline impedance in gastroesophageal reflux disease

Zhifeng Ma1, Taiyang Liu2, Jie Yang3,†()   

  1. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, Guizhou Provincial People's Hospital, Guiyang 550002, China
    2. Department of Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang 550002, China
    3. Department of Gastroenterology, Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou Medical University, Guiyang 550004, China
  • Received:2021-03-12 Published:2021-08-15
  • Corresponding author: Jie Yang
全文 ( ) 下载PDF ( ) 导出引用
引用本文：

马志凤, 刘太阳, 杨杰. 平均夜间基线阻抗在胃食管反流病中的应用[J]. 中华胃食管反流病电子杂志, 2021, 08(03): 129-135.

Zhifeng Ma, Taiyang Liu, Jie Yang. Application of mean nocturnal baseline impedance in gastroesophageal reflux disease[J]. Chinese Journal of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease(Electronic Edition), 2021, 08(03): 129-135.

目的

通过监测胃食管反流病（GERD）患者食管黏膜食管基线阻抗（BI）并探讨其价值。

方法

对2017年3月至2018年3月在我院诊断为GERD并接受上消化道内镜检查及24 h食道阻抗-pH监测的92例患者，分析不同类型GERD、难治性GERD患者BI特点及GERD症状评分与BI的关系。

结果

92例患者中有75例诊断为非糜烂性反流病（NERD），9例诊断为糜烂性食管炎（EE），8例诊断为Barrett 食管。NERD组在LES上3、5 cm处BI和远端BI均高于EE组。主要表现为胸痛病例其症状评分与LES上3、5、9 cm处BI呈正相关（r=0.420、0.470、0.475，P=0.046、0.024、0.022），主要表现为烧心病例食管BI与其症状评分无相关性。质子泵抑制剂（PPI）有效组在LES上3、5 cm处BI和远端BI均低于难治性烧心组，用于区分PPI有效组与难治性烧心组在LES上3、5 cm处BI的最佳截断值分别为2369，2936 ?。PPI有效组在LES上3、5、7 cm处BI和远端BI均低于难治性胸痛组，用于区分PPI有效组与难治性胸痛在LES上3、5、处BI的最佳截断值分别为3006、3053、3015 ?。

结论

BI在受损黏膜中BI值降低。NERD胸痛症状评分与BI值呈正相关。BI可预测PPI疗效，BI值较高的NERD患者可能无法从PPI中受益。最佳截断值可作为PPI难治性NERD的诊断指标。

关键词: 胃食管反流病, 质子泵抑制剂, 基线阻抗
Objective

To monitor the esophageal mucosal esophageal baseline impedance (BI) in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and explore its value.

Methods

For 92 patients with GERD diagnosed in our hospital from March 2017 to March 2018 and undergoing upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and 24-hour esophageal impedance pH monitoring, the BI characteristics of patients with different types of GERD and refractory GERD were analyzed, and the relationship between GERD symptom score and BI were compared.

Results

Of the 92 patients, 75 were diagnosed with non-erosive reflux disease (NERD), 9 were diagnosed with erosive esophagitis (EE), and 8 were diagnosed with Barrett's esophagus. BI at 3 cm and 5 cm and distal Bi above LES in the NERD group were higher than those in the EE group. The symptom score of patients with chest pain was positively correlated with BI at 3 cm, 5 cm, and 9 cm on the LES, while the BI of patients with heartburn had no correlation with the symptom score. Bi at 3 cm, 5 cm and distal BI above LES in PPI effective group were lower than those in refractory heartburn group. The best cut-off values of BI at 3 cm and 5 cm above LES were 2369 Ω and 2936 Ω, respectively. Bi at 3 cm, 5 cm, 7 cm,and distal BI above LES in PPI effective group were lower than those in refractory chest pain group. The best cut-off values for BI at 3 cm, 5 cm, and 7 cm on the LES to distinguish the PPI effective group and refractory chest pain are 3006 Ω, 3053 Ω, and 3015 Ω, respectively.

Conclusion

BI decreased in the damaged mucosa. The chest pain symptom score of NERD patients is positively correlated with the BI value. BI can predict the efficacy of PPI, and NERD patients with higher BI values may not benefit from PPI. The best cut-off value can be used as a diagnostic index for PPI-refractory NERD patients.

Key words: gastroesophageal reflux disease, proton pump inhibitors, baseline impedance
表1 NERD和EE组基线阻抗比较（
xˉ
±s）
组别 例数 BI 17 cm BI 15 cm BI 9 m BI 7 m BI 5 m BI 3 m 远端BI
NERD 75 2563.6±612.1 2520.7±692.3 2981.6±788.6 3034±729.1 2883.8±742.9 2587.2±845.8 2890.1±674.4
EE 9 2584.1±882.4 2534.7±992.1 2799.2±738.5 2678.2±572 2095.1±999.4 1977.8±914.1 2387.6±576.3
t值 -0.068# -0.055 0.659 1.41 2.897 2.026 2.141
P值 0.947 0.957 0.512 0.162 0.005 0.046 0.035
图1 胸痛症状评分与基线阻抗相关性分析
图2 2组烧心症状评分与基线阻抗相关性分析
表2 PPI有效组、难治性烧心组基线阻抗
组别 例数 BI 17 cm BI 15 cm BI 9 m BI 7 m BI 5 m BI 3 m 远端BI
PPI有效 35 2363.1±710.2 2364.5±729.4 2827.5±859.2 2760.5±798.9 2435.3±697.9 2068.5±829.7 2523.0±678.4
难治性烧心 14 2643.3±345.3 2587.7±453.7 2900.1±722.8 3010.6±588.4 2967.6±497.3 2708.3±526.1 2925.0±524.5
t值 -1.850# -1.062 -0.279 -1.059 -2.595 -2.669 -1.988
P值 0.071 0.294 0.781 0.295 0.013 0.01 0.053
表3 PPI有效组、难治性胸痛组基线阻抗
组别 例数 BI 17 cm BI 15 cm BI 9 m BI 7 m BI 5 m BI 3 m 远端BI
PPI有效 35 2363.1±710.2 2364.5±729.4 2827.5±859.2 2760.5±798.9 2435.3±697.9 2068.5±829.7 2523.0±678.4
难治性胸痛 14 2597.4±619.8 2570.8±804.0 3019.6±638.9 3333.2±722.2 3364.4±788.8 2956.8±957.9 3240.1±650.5
t值 -1.079 -0.869 -0.756 -2.326 -4.057 -3.24 -3.38
P值 0.286 0.389 0.454 0.024 0 0.002 0.001
图3 PPI有效和难治性烧心受试者工作特征曲线 注：PPI为质子泵抑制剂
图4 PPI有效和难治性胸痛受试者工作特征曲线 注：PPI为质子泵抑制剂
1
朱立人. 24 h食管阻抗-pH监测在NERD诊断中价值的临床研究[D]. 上海: 同济大学医学院,2009
2
Martinucci I, de Bortoli N, Savarino E, et al. Esophageal baseline impedance levels in patients with pathophysiological characteristics of functional heartburn [J]. Neurogastroenterol Motil, 2014, 26(4):546-555.
3
Frazzoni M, Savarino E, Bortoli ND, et al. Analyses of the post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index and nocturnal baseline impedance parameters increase the diagnostic yield of patients with reflux disease [J]. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2016, 14(1):40-46.
4
Kandulski A, Weigt J, Caro C, et al. Esophageal intraluminal baseline impedance differentiates gastroesophageal reflux disease from functional heartburn [J]. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2015, 13(6):1075-1081.
5
Vakil N, van Zanten SV, Kahrilas P, et al. The montreal definition and classification of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a global evidence-based consensus [J]. Am J Gastroenterol, 2006, 101(8):1125-1140.
6
Xie C, Sifrim D, Li Y, et al. Esophageal baseline impedance reflects mucosal integrity and predicts symptomatic outcome with proton pump inhibitor treatment [J]. J Neurogastroenterol Motil, 2018, 24(1):43-50.
7
Jiang L, Ye B, Lin L, et al. Role of altered esophageal intraluminal baseline impedance levels in patients with gatroesophageal reflux disease refractory to proton pump inhibitors [J]. Medicine (Abingdon), 2016, 95(33):e4351.
8
Cho YK, Lee JS, Lee TH, et al. The relationship of the post-reflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index and esophageal baseline impedance with gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms [J]. J Neurogastroenterol Motil, 2017, 23(2):237-244.
9
Sifrim D, Zerbib F. Diagnosis and management of patients with reflux symptoms refractory to proton pump inhibitors [J]. Gut, 2012, 61(9):1340.
10
Roman S, Gyawali CP, Savarino E, et al. Ambulatory reflux monitoring for diagnosis of gastro-esophageal reflux disease: Update of the Porto consensus and recommendations from an international consensus group [J]. Neurogastroenterol Motil, 2017, 29(10):1-15.
11
Gyawali CP, Kahrilas PJ, Savarino E, et al. Modern diagnosis of GERD: the Lyon consensus [J]. Gut, 2018, 67(7):1351-1362.
12
Zhong C, Duan L, Wang K, et al. Esophageal intraluminal baseline impedance is associated with severity of acid reflux and epithelial structural abnormalities in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease [J]. J Gastroenterol, 2013, 48(5):601-610.
13
Kohata Y, Fujiwara Y, Yamagami H, et al. Usefulness of baseline impedance in patients with proton pump inhibitor-refractory nonerosive reflux disease [J]. J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 2015, 30(S1):36-40.
14
Patel A, Wang D, Sainani N, et al. Distal mean nocturnal baseline impedance on pH-impedance monitoring predicts reflux burden and symptomatic outcome in gastro-oesophageal reflux disease [J]. Aliment Pharmacol Ther, 2016, 44(8):890-898.
15
Farré R, Blondeau K, Clement D, et al. Evaluation of oesophageal mucosa integrity by the intraluminal impedance technique [J]. Gut, 2011, 60(7):885-892.
16
Fass R, Sifrim D. Management of heartburn not responding to proton pump inhibitors [J]. Gut, 2009, 58(2):295-309.
17
Mainie I, Tutuian R, Shay S, et al. Acid and non-acid reflux in patients with persistent symptoms despite acid suppressive therapy: a multicentre study using combined ambulatory impedance-pH monitoring [J]. Gut, 2006, 55(10):1398-1402.
18
El-Serag H, Becher A, Jones R. Systematic review: persistent reflux symptoms on proton pump inhibitor therapy in primary care and community studies [J]. Aliment Pharmacol Ther, 2010, 32(6):720-737.
19
Frazzoni M, de Bortoli N, Frazzoni L, et al. The added diagnostic value of postreflux swallow-induced peristaltic wave index and nocturnal baseline impedance in refractory reflux disease studied with on-therapy impedance-pH monitoring [J]. Neurogastroenterol Motil, 2017, 29(3).
20
Frazzoni L, Frazzoni M, Bortoli ND, et al. Postreflux swallow‐induced peristaltic wave index and nocturnal baseline impedance can link PPI‐responsive heartburn to reflux better than acid exposure time [J]. Neurogastroenterol Motil, 2017, 29(11):e13116.
21
Rodriguez-Stanley S, Robinson M, Earnest DL, et al. Esophageal hypersensitivity may be a major cause of heartburn [J]. Am J Gastroenterol, 1999, 94(3):628-631.
22
Barish CF, Castell DO, Richter JE. Graded esophageal balloon distention. a new provocative test for noncardiac chest pain [J]. Dig Dis Sci, 1986, 31(12):1292-1298.
23
Hemmink GJ, Bredenoord AJ, Weusten BL, et al. Esophageal pH-impedance monitoring in patients with therapy-resistant reflux symptoms: 'on' or 'off' proton pump inhibitor? [J]. Am J Gastroenterol, 2008, 103(10):2446-2453.
24
Balaban DH, Yamamoto Y, Liu J, et al. Sustained esophageal contraction: a marker of esophageal chest pain identified by intraluminal ultrasonography [J]. Gastroenterology, 1999, 116(1):29.
[1] 贾卓奇, 周维茹, 张勇, 张广健, 付军科. 达·芬奇机器人与腹腔镜食管裂孔疝修补术的对比研究[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 410-414.
[2] 李亮, 洪楚原, 李明哲, 郝腾飞, Chongkuo Zi. 胃食管结合部抗反流机制探讨[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(01): 6-8.
[3] 杜兴, 罗颖, 高颖, 董庆申, 刘殿刚, 汪忠镐, 郑煜琳. 腹腔镜Nissen胃底折叠联合His角重建术治疗胃食管反流病的短期疗效[J]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(05): 510-515.
[4] 张继舜, 陈思旭, 钱洁, 尚占民, 郝建宇. 平均夜间基线阻抗对食管外症状胃食管反流病的临床诊断价值[J]. 中华胃肠内镜电子杂志, 2023, 10(02): 97-102.
[5] 王擎, 王冠峰, 陈星. 胃食管阀瓣的Hill分级在胃食管反流病中的应用价值[J]. 中华胃肠内镜电子杂志, 2023, 10(02): 125-130.
[6] 买买提·依斯热依力, 尹强, 尹海龙, 董雨微, 王永康, 克力木·阿不都热依木, 阿吉艾克拜尔·艾萨. 传统医药治疗胃食管反流病的研究进展[J]. 中华胃食管反流病电子杂志, 2023, 10(02): 100-104.
[7] 李鹏, 刘国祥, 李汝红. 经口内镜下贲门缩窄术治疗胃食管反流病的研究进展[J]. 中华胃食管反流病电子杂志, 2023, 10(02): 96-99.
[8] 文明, 熊英, 艾克拜尔·艾力, 克力木·阿不都热依木. 质子泵抑制剂治疗期间焦虑对胃食管反流病疗效的影响[J]. 中华胃食管反流病电子杂志, 2023, 10(02): 90-95.
[9] 范勇, 张利昉, 杨美琳. 改良经口内镜下贲门缩窄术治疗胃食管反流病效果分析[J]. 中华胃食管反流病电子杂志, 2023, 10(02): 65-68.
[10] 陆洪鹏, 袁芯, 郑树灏, 刘怡, 徐磊. 慢性咳嗽与胃食管反流病：双向两样本孟德尔随机化研究[J]. 中华胃食管反流病电子杂志, 2023, 10(02): 59-64.
[11] 闫晶, 蒋媛, 买买提·依斯热依力, 王俭, 王永康, 阿巴伯克力·乌斯曼, 王志, 克力木·阿不都热依木. 膈肌生物反馈训练对胃食管反流病的效果分析[J]. 中华胃食管反流病电子杂志, 2023, 10(01): 50-55.
[12] 张晓贝, 王伟刚, 李晓龙, 易风俊, 俞永江. 幽门螺旋杆菌感染与不同亚型胃食管反流病的相关性[J]. 中华胃食管反流病电子杂志, 2023, 10(01): 1-5.
[13] 张高松, 杨美琳, 袁莉, 俞炎波, 石琳妮. 内镜下贲门缩窄术对改善胃食管反流病患者生活质量的观察[J]. 中华胃食管反流病电子杂志, 2023, 10(01): 18-21.
[14] 李赞林, 马建惠, 王志. 腹腔镜袖状胃切除术对胃食管反流病疗效的系统评价与分析[J]. 中华胃食管反流病电子杂志, 2023, 10(01): 22-30.
[15] 伍振鹏, 乔钰涵, 向林, 江云颂, 彭居正, 吴丽娜, 程吕佳, 关炳生, 庄子康, 杨景哥. 腹腔镜袖状胃切除术中胃窦切缘与幽门的距离对术后胃食管反流病及减重效果的影响[J]. 中华肥胖与代谢病电子杂志, 2023, 09(01): 4-11.
阅读次数
全文


摘要

版权所有 中华医学会 中华医学电子音像出版社有限责任公司  京ICP备14006079号-1  网络出版服务许可证：(署)网出证(京)字第075号